USPTO serial 78725255
RZR RED ZONE RUMBLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROWLEY, SEAN MICHAEL
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with RZR RED ZONE RUMBLE?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Santa Barbara, CA
Santa Barbara, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Scott W. Kelley
Scott W. Kelley KELLY LOWRY & KELLEY, LLP6320 CANOGA AVE STE 1650WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91367-7704UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment in the nature of rugby games; Organization of sports events in the field of rugby | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2009 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 5, 2009 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Nov 27, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 27, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 27, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 5, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 15, 2006 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | CORV | REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 28, 2006 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jul 12, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 22, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 9, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Mar 1, 2006 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 1, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Feb 27, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |